MEENA ISHWARDAS GUPTA,MUMBAI V. ITO WD-41(3)(2), MUMBAI

ITA 5471/MUM/2025

AI Insights

The case involves Meena Ishwardas Gupta, the appellant, challenging an order passed by the National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC) / CIT(A) for the assessment year 2014-15. The primary contention was the CIT(A)'s failure to adjudicate additional legal grounds raised by the assessee during the appellate proceedings. These grounds were not considered in the CIT(A)'s decision, which led to the appeal before the ITAT. The ITAT found that the CIT(A) had not fulfilled his statutory duty to adjudicate all grounds raised and thus restored the matter for re-evaluation on the specific additional grounds.

• Counselvise Citation: [2025] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 783281 (ITAT-MUMBAI)
• Duration Of Justice: 2 month(s) 1 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 03-11-2025
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: SMC
• Assessment Year: 2014-2015
• Appeal Filed On: 01-09-2025
• Laws Referred To: Income Tax Act, 1961
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: V.K CHATURVEDI; VIRTUALLY
• Assessee Lawyers: RAJESH S. SHAH

Judgement Text

"1 IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “SMC” BENCH, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI SANDEEP GOSAIN, JUDICIAL MEMBER ITA No. 5471/Mum/2025 A.Ys: 2014-15 Meena Ishwardas Gupta C-1/4, Suder nagar, S.V. Road, Malad (W) Mumbai PAN – AACPG2818A Vs ITO, Ward – 41(3)(2) Kautilya Bhavan, BKC Mumbai. (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee by Shri Rajesh S. Shah Revenue by Shri. V.K Chaturvedi, Sr. DR (Virtually) Date of Hearing 03.11.2025 Date of Pronouncement 04.11.2025 ORDER PER SANDEEP GOSAIN, JM: These appeal has been filed by the assessee challenging the different impugned order dated 18.07.2025 passed under section 250 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (‘the Act’), by the National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC) / CIT(A) for the assessment year 2014-15. 2. At the outset, Ld. AR drawn my attention to the fact that he has raised additional ground during appellate proceedings pending before Ld. CIT(A) and drawn my attention to page 5 of the Ld. CIT(A)’s order wherein assessee has raised additional grounds No. 1 to 3 which are legal in nature, but Ld. CIT(A) had not adjudicated any of the additional grounds so raised by the assessee. Printed from counselvise.com 2 ITA No. 5610//Mum/2025 Malan Mohan Khade., Mumbai. 3. After having gone through the entire facts of the present case and after hearing the parties at length I found the although assessee had raised specific additional grounds No. 1 to 3 before Ld. CIT(A) but Ld. CIT(A) had not adjudicated the same and dismissed the appeal of the assessee on the other grounds. In my view Ld. CIT(A) being a quasi-judicial authority was under statutory and legal duty to adjudicate all the grounds raised by the assessee before him but on the contrary he has failed to discharge his statutory duties. 7. Be that as it may, without going into the merits of the issues raised by the assessee and considering the fact that Ld. CIT(A) had not adjudicated the legal grounds raised by the assessee. Therefore considering the overall circumstances of the present case, we deem it proper to restore the matter back to the file of Ld. CIT(A) with a direction to decide the additional ground raised by the assessee providing opportunity of hearing to the assessee. The assessee shall not seek any adjournment on frivolous grounds and shall remain cooperative during the course of proceedings. 8. Before parting, we make it clear that our decision to restore the matter back to the file of the Ld. CIT(A) shall in no way be construed as having any reflection or expression on the merits of the dispute which shall be adjudicated by the Ld. CIT(A) independently in accordance with law. Printed from counselvise.com 3 ITA No. 5610//Mum/2025 Malan Mohan Khade., Mumbai. 9. In the result the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes. Order pronounced in the open court on 04/11/2025 Sd/- (SANDEEP GOSAIN) (JUDICIAL MEMBER) Mumbai: Dated: 04/11/2025 KRK, Sr. PS. Copy of the order forwarded to: (1)The Appellant (2) The Respondent (3) The CIT (4) The CIT (Appeals) (5) The DR, I.T.A.T. True Copy By order (Asstt. Registrar) ITAT, Mumbai Printed from counselvise.com "